[Militant, No 521, 26 September 1980, p. 16]
The conflict between Iran and Iraq, which has grown in intensity, in the past twelve months, has now broken out into open warfare between the two countries.
Iraq has conquered 200 miles of Iranian territory and is reported to have completely surrounded the oil refinery of Abadan, and its neighbouring port. Abadan is the largest oil refinery in the world, and accounts for over 70% of Iran’s oil.
Iran has countered with the bombing of Baghdad and the refinery of Basra, together with other Iraqi towns. As we go to press, it appears that Iraq has had the better of the initial conflict.
Iranian military might, under the Shah the most powerful in the area, has been weakened by the denial of spare parts for its air-force, particularly from the American embargo. The constant purges of the officer caste and the general dissatisfaction in Iran at the consequences of the Khomeini regime’s policies have also taken their toll.
The present conflict broke out over the Iraqi regime’s reclaiming of the vital Shatt al-Arab waterway.
This was ceded to the Shah of Iran in 1975 in return for the Shah’s agreement to assist in the suppression of the Kurdish revolt in Iraq: The Shatt al-Arab waterway is the only outlet for the otherwise land-locked Iran [Iraq].
But the conflict has nothing to do with furthering the interests of the workers and peasants of Iran and Iraq. It is a struggle for power, prestige, influence and domination of the area by the elites which rule both countries. The Iraqi regime has a ruthless and bloody record in suppression both of the working class and the national minorities of the country, particularly the Kurds.
Amnesty International has reported that political murders in Iraq have averaged more than a hundred a year in the past five years!
On the other hand, the Khomeini regime has also ruthlessly suppressed opposition on the left and also the growing discontent of the minorities in Iran. The Kurds, the Arabs in Khuzestan, and the Baluchis have been in growing conflict with the Iranian regime.
The reactionary clerical regime of Khomeini has not hesitated to use religion and the oppressed minorities in Iraq against the Iraqi regime. A majority of the Iraqi population are Shi’ite Muslims. But the ruling clique around Iraqi „strongman“ Saddam Hussein in the Baathist Party are from a minority of the Sunni Muslims.
The Iraqi regime has replied in kind, by stirring up the revolt of the Arabs in Khuzestan. Hussein has calculated that the Khomeini regime is so weakened by internal upheavals that it can be defeated in a war which would lay the basis for a coup and the coming to power of a regime more acceptable to Iraq.
The sheer cynicism of these ruling castes is demonstrated by the fact that the Iraqi regime sought the collaboration of the Shah in suppressing the revolt of the Kurdish population. It has also recently courted the reactionary Saudi Arabian regime. Yet, as a means of furthering its own interests, it has not hesitated recently to support the Kurdish minority in Iran against the Khomeini regime.
In this conflict, it is the workers and peasants who have most to lose. Imperialism is weeping crocodile tears at the consequences of the war. They, however, bear the main responsibility for the explosive tensions which exist in this region.
It was western capitalism, particularly Britain and France, who were responsible for creating the patchwork of artificial states, which cut across the bodies of different peoples throughout the area. Every one of the states is composed of a number of large minorities.
On the basis of landlordism and capitalism, it is impossible for a long-term solution to be effected. On the other hand, even if landlordism and capitalism is destroyed, as in the case of Syria, if it is on the basis of the establishment of a deformed workers‘ state, the national problem can still remain, and indeed can even be intensified.
Imperialism’s chief concern is the danger posed to oil supplies from the region . About 60 % of the capitalist world’s oil supplies flow through the Straight of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf.
The working class and poor peasants have nothing to gain from this conflict and everything to lose
The working class and poor peasants of the region have nothing to gain and everything to lose from this conflict. The key to any long-term solution lies in their hands. Neither support for Iranian clerical Muslim reaction, nor support for the equally vicious Baathist elite of Iraq can assist the working people of the area.
Only a socialist federation of the whole area, which would involve the overthrow of the Hussein regime and the Khomeini regime, and their replacement by a workers‘ and poor peasants‘ democracy can remove the simmering conflicts which scar the area.
This in turn would mean the beginning of the end of the reactionary Sheikdoms throughout the Gulf. Hand-in-hand with the socialist federation of the Middle East, such a development could mean that the enormous benefits of oil and other natural resources could be used to transform the lives of the workers and peasants of the area.
Schreibe einen Kommentar